Globalization was supposed to align the values. They're diverging

Globalization’s Aims and Limits

• Many argue globalization was never truly about aligning values, but about capital seeking cheap labor and efficient manufacturing. Expecting moral convergence from this is seen as naïve.
• Some note partial value alignment among rich democracies (EU/UK, Japan, South Korea, North America), but not in states like China, which leverage global markets without adopting liberal norms.
• Others stress that economic integration preceded deep cultural integration; imagining the reverse (culture first, trade later) is raised as an interesting but intractable counterfactual.

Wealth, Surveys, and Value Divergence

• Several commenters want more raw data from the cited value surveys and link directly to the Nature paper and World Values Survey.
• Observations: in the limited numbers shown (e.g., Pakistan/Australia divorce attitudes), both directions change, sometimes narrowing or widening gaps; relative change can be large even when absolute levels remain low.
• Some point out the article implicitly treats liberal-secular positions as “tolerant” and “good,” which others dispute as a normative bias.

Tolerance, Autonomy, and Social Externalities

• One camp defines tolerance as letting others do what they want with their bodies (sexuality, abortion, prostitution) without interference; opposing this is labeled straightforwardly “intolerant.”
• Critics argue that individual behavior shapes social norms and opportunities (e.g., family formation, social cohesion), so societies may legitimately police some conduct; “tolerant” has become code for a specific ideological package, not a neutral principle.
• Analogies are drawn to slavery and to obviously antisocial acts to question where limits on “what people do with their bodies” should lie.

Religion, Anti‑Western Sentiment, and Elites

• Commenters from poorer or “anti‑Western” countries note that as wealth grows, distrust of Westernizing local elites can increase; these elites are seen as culturally detached, unlike some low-key rich in the West.
• There is growing skepticism that adopting Western liberal norms is worth the perceived trade‑offs (family breakdown, isolation, demographic decline), even if they bring gains in individual freedom and humane treatment.
• Others counter that liberalization is not clearly the cause of these social problems.

Inequality, Social Media, and Internal Polarization

• Several see rising income and wealth inequality as a major driver of value polarization, supported by cited research.
• Within Western countries, “winner” global cities and left‑behind regions are drifting apart culturally and politically; this fuels populist nationalism and culture‑war conflicts.
• Some blame social media more than globalization for splintered realities and extremism; algorithms amplify the most provocative views.

Imperialism, Universal Values, and Western Hypocrisy

• A large subthread debates whether promoting free speech, democracy, and human rights globally is principled or a form of modern Western imperialism.
• Critics highlight histories of coups, support for dictators, colonial exploitation, and current injustices (high incarceration, homelessness, foreign interventions) as undermining Western moral authority.
• Defenders argue that not all imperial projects are equally bad; some cite examples where Western or earlier empires also produced benefits (infrastructure, ending certain abuses), while opponents respond that this downplays long‑term harms and “heads I win, tails you lose” reasoning.
• There is disagreement over whether imperialism can ever be justified and whether focusing only on Western abuses while ignoring other powers’ expansion is itself biased.

Cultural Change, Family, and Obedience

• A long parenting subthread discusses declining emphasis on strict childhood obedience. Many still see obedience as vital for safety and building discipline, but distinguish it from punishing ordinary childishness.
• Changes in fertility (fewer children), birth control, and safer environments are seen as reshaping how much obedience is pragmatically needed.
• In a broader sense, some argue that high tolerance and individualism encourage people to cluster with like‑minded others and disengage from families or communities with different values, potentially weakening traditional social bonds.

Homogenization vs Divergence

• Anecdotes (e.g., non‑Americans speaking with American accents online, English dominance, global brands) suggest strong cultural homogenization in consumer and media spheres.
• Others note this is heavily selection‑biased (who is online, in VR, in missionary schools) and coexists with deepening political, religious, and moral divides.
• At least one reader of the paper reports that many countries are moving in the same direction on key values but at different speeds, so the “divergence” is more about widening gaps than opposite trajectories.

Overall Framing Critiques

• Some think the headline overstates globalization’s role; the underlying work is viewed as more nuanced, showing interactions between wealth, nationalism, religion, inequality, and regime type.
• Others call the whole premise—that globalization should align values—misguided; they see value conflict as an enduring feature of a world where societies compete, adapt, and selectively borrow from one another.